Law Firm 4.0 Blog

Lawyers (and everyone else), ask yourself: Am I my resume?

With yet another high profile resume-fake (Scott Thompson, who was ousted as Yahoo! CEO after four months among accusations that he lied on his resume about having a computer science degree) I am compelled to write this blog post about telling the truth on your website and other biographies.

Whether you call it biography, bio, profile, CV, vita or work history, this document should never have an ounce of fiction on it.  No fudging on capabilities and experience, board and community service, education (years, your major, the institutions you attended) . . . simply, don’t say you did something if you didn’t do it.

I read an article in the Dallas Morning News yesterday about a new book by author James Donovan, “The Blood of Heroes,” with the subtitle, “The 13-day struggle for the Alamo and the sacrifice that forced a nation.”  Apparently, the Alamo stories that we were taught in K-12 history classes were not true.  Davy Crockett was not executed by Mexican hero/despot Santa Anna, and the storied Alamo battle didn’t last 15-minutes, but more like 45 minutes or longer.  You might wonder what this has to do with lawyer biographies?

Donovan's Dallas Morning News article started:

“Everyone knows that Davy Crockett was executed after the battle of the Alamo by Santa Anna.  Except he wasn’t.”

Donovan, a Dallas author, writes:

“Crockett’s death, and the duration of the Alamo battle, are two examples of how historical events often become encrusted with myth, legend and error, deliberate or not. Particularly before the invention of electronic recording devices around the turn of the 20th century, history was more pliable, especially for those with an agenda — or simply to make a good story even better.”

I love the phrase, “…history was more pliable, especially for those with an agenda – or simply to make a good story even better.”  We do this all the time in conversation, subconsciously believing that facts should never get in the way of a good story.

He concludes his article:

“History, like life, may be messy, awkward and embarrassing on occasion, but that’s because it’s about people, and none of us is perfect. Without respect for historical truth, we compromise our ability to grow and improve both as individuals and as a society.”

Too many lawyer resumes include every line of what the person has ever done, spoken or written.  Bios should follow the governing clothes-closet management rule:  Don’t put one new clothing article in your closet without eliminating something old.

Without such stewardship, the result of this year-after-year layering of data, whether online or on paper, is that your memory fades and you no longer remember if it was true.  If there was an error or omission 20 years ago, chances are you are still carrying it forward – simply because you aren’t looking at it that carefully, you can’t remember, and you assume it must be true because it used to be true. And it’s about you, so what’s the big deal?

My company, Content Pilot, is preparing to conduct our fifth research study, “2012 AmLaw 100 Websites: Ten Foundational Best Practices,” where we analyze the websites of America’s top 100 law firms based on gross revenue. The 4^th Foundational Best Practice is lawyer biographies.  I’ll write more about the foundational attributes of a “best practices” lawyer resume in another post, but the glaring problem we see is that too many senior partners don’t care about their bios.  This opens doors, however, for those partners who do care – by comparison, who stand out as relevant, current and subject matter experts in their fields.  After all, that’s the goal of your website (and other online sources, such as LinkedIn) biography – come across well enough that you are short-listed for a particular matter.  Then it’s your job to get chosen as “the one.”

When your bio is riddled with old information – or worse, lies (a strong word, I know) about what you’ve done – everything else that is accurate is questioned.  Don’t risk the reputation damage by being “too busy” to update your resume when your marketing team requests it.

The musical, “A Chorus Line” starts with an energetic number, “I Hope I Get It,” where the auditioning dancers start competing against each other for a job in the chorus.  In unison they sing,

“God, I hope I get it. I hope I get it.  How many boys, how many girls?  Look at all the people, at all the people” . . . Then one dancer sings, “I really need this job, please god I need this job, I’ve got to get this job!”

As it continues, it segues into a lone male dancer singing,

“Who am I anyway? Am I my resume? That is a picture of a person I don't know. What does he want from me? What should I try to be? So many faces all around, and here we go. I need this job, oh God, I need this show.” 

So, ask the question:  Am I my resume?  Take a fresh and critical look at every claim you make – the three-prong test against which your assertion should be judged is:  1) Is it truthful? 2) Is it current? (If it’s not, buyers of legal services may not care about it.) And, 3) Is it relevant? (If it’s not, buyers of legal services won’t care about it.)

What law firms can learn from Dyson's (think vacuum cleaners) anti-branding slur.

British industrial designer, Sir James Dyson, is best known for his iconic bagless vacuum cleaner that he peddles on television. And among frequent travelers who wash their hands in airport restrooms, for the Dyson Airblade, which dries your hands as would the edge of a tornado.

But after a recent comment in which he said he didn't believe in branding - "We're only as good as our latest product. I don't believe in brand at all." - he is now famous for being the anti-branding guy.

Matt Straz, blogger of MediaPost's Online Spin, wrote yesterday, "Like a cat coughing up a hair ball, Dyson's comment caused a loud, involuntary response from the advertising world."

Let me give you some context: Dyson was speaking at Wired magazine's "Disruptive by Design" conference earlier this month. He responded to the question, "Does brand make the product or does product make the brand?" He said that "Brand was the only word that was banned at his company," then concluded with the statement above.

A Forbes.com article about his statement said, "A remarkable comment from someone who has stood in front of a camera for the last decade or more on behalf of creating his own eponymous brand of vacuum cleaners, and spending millions in the process."

The Forbes article suggests that Dyson may not understand what "brand" or "branding is, and it goes on to describe what it is. It talks about how successful brands create new rituals:

"Powerful brands have rituals. Much as Starbucks changed how we have coffee in the morning, and Ikea has changed how we interact with newly-purchased furniture, Dyson has changed the ritual of how we interact with our vacuum by handing us one that can be snapped together (or unsnapped) much like Lego blocks. The rollerball changes the way we move across the floor. The quick-open canister lets us dump right into the garbage can, rather than unleashing those nasty vacuum bags. And if you really want to get into it, there’s the ritual of innovation–and creating 5,127 prototypes, and more innovation."

I asked friend and colleague Norm Rubenstein, Partner and branding expert at the Zeughauser Group, about his take on Dyson's slur - and whether law firm leaders with an anti-branding bias might have new fodder to dispute its efficacy.  Norm says:

"There is profound irony in Dyson’s claim 'I don’t believe in brand at all.' Dyson’s company is reminiscent of Apple, a company whose followers buy products, often products they don’t need, because of their elegant marriage of form and content. In creating his high-end vacuum cleaner, Dyson has made it the ultimate status symbol: what greater triumph of brand recognition than to invest in a luxury good that lives in a closet with one’s cleaning supplies as opposed to on a desk or adorning one’s person? And once people got on the Dyson bandwagon, reinforced through traditional advertising that always has extolled the product’s innovative technology and consumer benefits, they suddenly found a need for Dyson’s chic fans, and one suspects, will require his future products in the same way as they are introduced."

Online Spin also points to Nike, who has significantly reduced its investment in traditional branding pillars, such as advertising.

"Having relied for years on mass branding messages like 'Just do it,' the company has now dramatically scaled back its investment in traditional branding. Nike has also reduced its emphasis on big brand athletes like Tiger Woods, Michael Jordan, and Lance Armstrong. Instead, the company has focused on creating software and gadgets like its new Fuel wristband that measures athletic output. Instead of marketing products, Nike is using products to market itself."

To that, Norm says,

"The truth is that brand development and brand maintenance, decidedly different stages in a product’s life cycle, are opportunities to employ different tools and tactics for reinforcing brand awareness and loyalty. Products and services require significant marketing focused on developing and raising visibility in their infancy: in their adolescence, assuming they come to enjoy unaided top-of-mind recognition as both Dyson and Nike have done, they can rely on satisfied customers to help sustain their brand equity."

Social media has changed the branding landscape in ways we couldn't have imagined even four years ago. It supports both mass customization and engagement at the most powerful of all levels - person to person. And the dollar investment is a fraction of the cost of traditional broadcast and print advertising.

Norm agrees,

"The emergence of social media makes it possible for a company like Nike to shift the extent to which it has to rely on traditional branding tools. In its previous marketing, which always has been advertising-intensive, Nike has made its 'swoosh' synonymous with the achievements of admired athletes. By creating ongoing demand for its products and aligning them with a promise of quality and performance, Nike now enjoys the benefit of extensive brand equity. As the marketplace shifts and consumers now have become their own product reviewers/marketers, the company theoretically can take advantage of marketing that shifts its focus away from admired role models (who often disappoint in real life) and place it on the traditional—might one say, the average, buyer—the buyer whose endorsement in the Zagat world in which everyone’s opinion counts—can begin to redefine its approach to the marketplace."

So, what does this mean for law firms? It's challenging for law firms, even the largest of the AmLaw 100 firms, to defend their brand positions as unique among all their competitors. Is it possible? Yes, absolutely, but it requires research, rigor and patience, plus a significant and consistent investment of time and money. Law firms can take advantage of all the media that Dyson, Nike and Starbucks use - but they often don't have the stomach for it or the budget to sustain it. It also requires leadership and vision constancy - meaning, firms whose Chair and Managing Partner positions are up for grabs every two or three years will have a harder time than those firms who invest in the same leaders year after year.

Norm concluded our interview by saying,

"... For a law firm to follow the lead of a Nike and begin to shift its marketing focus, say by taking greater advantage of new media as a critical component of its marketing mix, it needs to assess the brand equity it already enjoys, and if it is not an acknowledged market leader in the spaces for which its seeks to be known (defined not by the firm, but by the market), it will need to maintain or to develop a robust strategy that well may continue to require extensive use of traditional marketing tools (e.g., thought leadership and credentialing)."

I'd say that Dyson is all about branding, even if he doesn't call it that.

 

Do the leaders of your law firm use social media? Employees trust leaders who do.

By now, most law firms have inked social media policies, yet leaders' fears are still cresting at the thought of firm employees' fingers running amok and damaging the firms' reputations in some way. It seems this trepidation is a one-way street, however, as BRANDfog's 2012 Social Media and Leadership Survey found.

BRANDfog surveyed hundreds of employees in companies ranging in size from start-ups to Fortune 500 behemoths asking about company executives and their use of social media to communicate with them and the rest of the world. 81% said that CEOs who use social media are "better equipped" than their peers to lead companies in this contemporary business environment. This included "communicating values and shaping corporate reputation."

82% said they were more likely or much more likely to trust a CEO and other top executives who use social media. And 78% said that they'd prefer to work for a company whose leaders regularly use social media.

Most respondents agreed that social media significantly aids leaders' engagement with key stakeholders:

1. 89.3% said executives can better communicate with customers
2. 84.7% believed that it improves communication with employees
3. 66.3% said executives should use it to communicate with investors
4. 71% said executive engagement in social media enhances your brand.

But you can't fix a company environment that's broken, they said. Only 45% believed that you can improve bad company morale via C-suite social media use.

Erik Sass of the MediaPost Blog The Social Graf notes: "All this makes interesting reading when juxtaposed with actual rates of social media engagement among CEOs and top execs. According to figures cited by BRANDfog, while 61% of Fortune 500 brands use Twitter to engage with customers, just 2.5% of Fortune 500 CEOs are actively using Twitter."

What can law firm leaders take from this? Employees want more communication from you - not just staff, but your lawyers, too. There is a readily available platform you can use to post your musings, and to show how you understand today's world of business communication. I know you have a lot to say -- roll up your sleeves and plan your communication strategy for the next 12 months. Choose the social media forum that makes the most sense for you - LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook or a blog - and commit to it.

Your firm's clients will be listening, too. And they will finally have a chance to know why you have been chosen to lead your firm.

Loads of Buzz: What happens if an employer asks for your Facebook password?

Since I first read the story last week of the employer requiring an applicant to share his Facebook password during an interview (a condition for employment), business, government, politicians and loads of lawyers have commented on its appropriateness and legality. The article, in the March 20, 2012 edition of The Social Graf by Erik Sass, reports on a survey where one in five tech companies rejected an applicant because of something they found in their social media profile.

Most everyone interviewed or writing about this is firmly against employers asking for passwords. The Department of Justice described the employer's request as "overly coercive." Yet some employers are still asking employees to log in to Facebook during an interview (believing it is less egregious than asking for the password outright).

Employers agree that Facebook and other social media sites are the best background checks of all. They hire social listening experts, who are the digital gumshoes of our time. We know that lawyers scrape social media content and use what they find in courtrooms to discredit witnesses, defendants and plaintiffs. The Florida Bar Association scours it to determine whether bar applicants are suitable for membership. So, plenty of employers and others are using it today to evaluate job candidates, current employees and others, and essentially making decisions based on what they unearth - thumbs up or thumbs down on this person's credibility and suitability.

Too many law firms have written about this recent story, but have tread too lightly for my liking on whether they think it's a defensible idea. I asked Mark Shank and Greg McAllister at Gruber Hurst Johansen Hail & Shank for their opinion -- here is what they said:

HEADLINE: Employers, be cool—but don’t chill.

The days of employers ignoring social media are in the distant past. In fact, responsible employers provide reasonable social media policies (although many seem paralyzed by this process). Unfortunately, too many employers’ regulations are overbroad, invasive, and—here’s the magic phrase—chill employees’ rights.

The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) gives rights to employees and tells employers not to “interfere with, restrain, or coerce” those rights. So internal alarms rang when reading a few statements from the “Employers Asking for Employees’ Passwords. article.

Statement No. 1. interviewers asked interviewees “...for their Facebook profile passwords as part of the job interview process.”

First, there are proposed state laws to prohibit employers requiring access to applicants’ social media accounts. Also, job applicants receive protections from discrimination under the NLRA. Thus, employers requesting profile passwords could later be charged with discrimination.

To make things worse, employers could incur liability for their request. For example, employers could face liability for discrimination, negligent analysis of the profile, failure to train interviewees, or improper surveillance. And a well-recognized company issued a warning: Facebook’s Chief Privacy Officer warned companies that Facebook could “take action to protect the privacy and security of our users, whether by engaging policymakers or, where appropriate, by initiating legal action, including by shutting down applications that abuse their privileges."

Statement No. 2. “...employers force employees to become online ‘friends’ with the human resources manager...”

Regulating “friending” on social media is not a bad idea, if done for the right purpose. For example, prohibiting employees from pressuring other employees to be Facebook “friends” may be allowed if the intent is to discourage harassment.

But forcing employees to “friend” their employer’s human resources (HR) is a potential NLRA violation. The NLRA protects employees’ rights to discuss union activity and other activities. It seems reasonable that requiring employees to add HR as a “friend” would illegally restrict, or at least interfere with, the employee’s rights to discuss protected activities.

Statement No. 3. “...contractual agreements not to post negative comments about the employer are now commonplace.”

That statement is (1) true and (2) a concern for employers with a policy that fails to narrowly define “negative.” Simply prohibiting “negative” language—especially if the policy fails to limit the scope of “negative” language—is likely unlawful under the NLRA.

But employers’ hands are not tied. For example, it’s not unlawful to prohibit employees from slandering the employer, if the prohibition includes language that clearly limits illegal activity.

Note No. 1. A note for Law Firm 4.0 readers assisting volunteer organizations: volunteer organizations utilizing social media are frequently and wisely incorporating policies to promote themselves, protect their brand, and limit liability.

Note No. 2. Employees, remember that using your work computer and work accounts often provide many fewer protections than the protections discussed above.

Mark Shank can be reached at mshank@ghjhlaw.com and Greg McAllister can be reached at gmcallister@ghjhlaw.com.

Bits and Pieces from James Kane's LMA Keynote Presentation - March 15, 2012

Like nearly 1,000 other LMA members last Thursday morning, I listened to our conference opener keynote, James Kane, speak about "loyalty."

It could be the best keynote I've ever heard in my life.

Thanks to Mark Usellis and Jill Weber, conference co-chairs, and Betsi Roach, LMA Executive Director (plus the conference committee and ACI) for bringing him to LMA.

Loyalty is old news as a topic. But it clearly remains elusive, as evidenced by the 4,346 books that appear in an Amazon book search for "loyalty." We love reading about it (or at least writing about it), and we hope that spending more time thinking and talking about it will move the loyalty needle to us over our personal and professional competitors. We believe we are loyal and we desperately want others to be loyal to us.

But are they? And are we?

Jim Kane described four relationship levels that are theoretically familiar to all of us, but I don't think it's human nature to analyze whether our friends/clients reside on one level or another. The four levels are as follows (and I am likely paraphrasing here, since I was furiously jotting down notes):

1. On the bottom is "antagonistic" - or, "I hate you." Ugh, we all want to avoid that.
2. Next is "transactional." Many lawyer/client and other relationships are like this. Essentially, you are viewed as "fine," but the person isn't loyal to you. They pay you for performing a service and they might be satisfied with you - but they aren't loyal.
3. Next up is "predisposed" - or "neutral." It means the person likes you, but that could change if something bad happens.
4. Finally, on the top is "loyal." People give you opportunities when they are loyal, they are advocates for you and pass positive messages about you on to someone else.

He spoke about the difference between loyalty and satisfaction. Kane said that satisfaction is a mood, and it's about the past. The person is focusing on what you've done for them and whether it satisfied them.

Loyalty, on the other hand, is a behavior and is about the future. It's about what that person can (and will) do for you. Loyalty is anyone saying, "You make my life easier. You make my life better." It is a measurement of what makes up your relationship beyond performing services and receiving money for it. Such as, trust, belonging, purpose and fulfillment.

Trust, Kane said, equals competency, character, consistency and capacity. All four of these elements must be present for someone to really trust you in a business setting. He added, "You get no credit for being trustworthy. It's the expectation." I recall him suggesting that people who say they are trustworthy are clearly missing the point about trust. He used Ford's advertising slogan a few years ago as an example: "Quality is Job 1." We all laughed when Kane admonished Ford for using a basic expectation that we consumers have (that the automobile that I am buying will actually and consistently go) as something special or unique.

He also used certain of Comcast's value statements/promises as poor examples or ineffective ways of engendering trust. They are:

• "We will treat your home with courtesy and respect."
• And, "We are here for you 24/7."

Kane chided Comcast and said, "You don't get credit for these things! You are a cable company! We expect this from you!"

The only way to build trust is to align your expectations with your client's. Trust is simply all about understanding and managing expectations.

Here are a few more snippets from his presentation:

1. When you make a donation to charity, give your clients credit. They are the ones that make it possible for you to make the donation.
2. Recognition - how well do you really know your client? He said at least six times - with heat and passion - how much he hates US Airways. Kane, in his introduction said that he flew nearly 180,000 miles last year on US Airways. Not because he is loyal, but because, in Philadelphia, they hold him hostage.
   
   He noted that he doesn't eat meat or chicken, but that every time he flies (always in first class), the flight attendant asks him, "Mr. Kane, what would you like for lunch/dinner - chicken or chicken?" Every time he tells them he doesn't eat it and asks what else they have. They never make a note of it and never remember.
   
   In contrast, he told a story about Singapore Airlines (a favorite of most experienced global travelers). When the flight attendant approached him about a beverage, he asked if they had Island Chill water. She said they did not. Two days later when he was back on Singapore Airlines for his return flight, the flight attendant brought him (yes, you guessed it) a bottle and said, "Mr. Kane, here is your Island Chill water."
   
   Singapore Airlines completely gets recognition. They care about it and demonstrate it in countless small, but meaningful ways.
   
   That builds trust. That builds loyalty.
3. Lawyers, when you have a client coming to your office, inform your receptionist so your client can be warmly greeted by name. The fact that your client is arriving at your office at the time your appointment is scheduled shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.
4. Be insightful. Look beyond the obvious. It's the most critical thing you can do, Kane says.
5. Be proactive. Don't confuse being courteous with proactivity. Do something that your client never thought he needed. Here is an example: A man who forgot his mother's birthday went into a flower shop. Sheepish, he needed to place a rush order. The flowers were delivered and mother was happy. That was the flower shop doing its job - and being courteous.
   
   Eleven months later, the forgetful man received a postcard from the florist reminding him of his mother's birthday in a few days. That was proactive.
6. Identity. This especially resonates with me. Share things about yourself, and your listeners will find something in you that they like (because it's familiar to them).
   
   Kane started his presentation with a fast-paced series of declarative statements about himself, illustrated with pictures, logos and such. It was stunningly effective and funny, and the audience, one-by-one, bought into Jim Kane because each of us connected to something that he said. He revealed a lot about his childhood, background, sensibilities, likes and dislikes - it felt like the discharge of an automatic weapon in its rapid fire.
   
   He said that if he took an MRI of our brains before he started that introduction, it would look like a flat-line. After it, the MRI would look entirely different -- it would light up like a Christmas tree because of the various hormones that were activated in our brain chemistry. Because we were connecting with him.

The short description on his home page best synthesizes what he does:

Merging the worlds of business, neuroscience, and behavioral psychology, James Kane has been recognized as one of the leading researchers and consultants in the science of loyalty and the role it plays in human relationships and the communities we form.

He has two books: The Loyalty Switch, and a new one, Virtually Loyal (the secret to making your digital relationships loyal). I am buying both.

The Elephant in the Room: Marketing Technology Trends you can't Afford to Ignore

That's the title of our ILTA/LMA panel at the Legal Marketing Association's pre-conference CMO session tomorrow. (This is the first formal joint venture between LMA and ILTA - the first of many, I hope.) Starting at 11 CT, Kate Cain, the new Director of Market Intelligence at Sidley, will kick off our session as moderator. Panelists are Joe Calve, CMO at Morrison & Foerster; Mark Greene, Chief Business Development Officer at Waller; Bob Robertson, Chief Marketing Officer at Greenberg Traurig; and me.

We had attendees complete a two-minute survey in advance of our session so we could tailor our remarks to their interests. The hottest button issues of this CMO audience are: CRM, experience databases and proposal centers, websites and social media. And we are covering all these topics, sharing trends, then discussing our real-world experiences to make the planning, process and implementations successful. All of us have a business focus - a use-case focus, rather than climbing into the features of the technology tools. We all believe this is where success begins.

If you are interested in receiving a copy of our handouts after tomorrow, please email me at mcmurray@contentpilot.net.

I hope to see you at the conference! (If you are at LMA, please stop by the Content Pilot booth - #316 - and say hi.)

SMU Law School Law Practice Management Class 2012 - What's on their minds?

Last week I taught Southern Methodist University's Law Practice Management class - for the third year in a row. In 2011, the students were mostly 2Ls, but this year, there was an equal mix of 4Es (evening students who have fulltime jobs during the day), second and third years. They are in this class not to learn about the practice of law, but to study the business of law. (Read last year's blog post about this class.)

This course was created and is taught by Mark Shank, partner in the litigation boutique, Gruber Hurst Johansen Hail Shank.

Like last year, I kicked off my presentation, "Marketing on the Internet", by asking two questions:

1. When you think of starting your careers in a year or two, what is the biggest opportunity that you see the Internet can bring you?
2. What is your greatest fear when you think about the Internet and your career?

We discussed the students' answers before I continued with the Ten Foundational Best Practices of law firm websites, and the increasingly far-reaching world of serious social media. I've written about both on this blog.

Because these students are covering the "real world" aspects of running a law practice, they will be much better prepared than their classmates who don't understand the complexities of law firm profitability, client relationship management, service delivery, business development - and yes, the opportunities and risks associated with marketing on the Internet.

Here is how the students answered the first question (I am using their names with their permission - and you can find them all on LinkedIn if you want to get better acquainted with them):

1. Steven Strobl (a 4E entrepreneur): The biggest opportunity that the Internet can bring . . . is the ability to easily, cheaply communicate at a global level. The Internet is the ultimate symbol of services globalization. More people are connected every year, making it one of the easiest ways to increase your clientele on a global scale.
2. Brett Talley: The Internet is an easy way to connect with clients and provide info about your law firm. The problem is that a lot of firms use web pages in much the same way, and they often all look the same to prospective clients. So, the way the Internet is being utilized currently provides an opportunity to do something different - to stand out.
3. Laura Fenstad (2L): Biggest opportunity that I see are websites that rank law firms and give people a chance to blog about their experiences.
4. Emily Benbrook: Online client reviews of the work attorneys have previously provided for them. Yelp, Google Reviews, etc.
5. J. Brooks Durham (2L): You can learn about your new employer and learn how to advance in that practice area by learning about the career path of the partners and senior associates. Often there is information available online that you cannot get from them face-to-face.
6. Chase Crosby: Access to a wider consumer base, which (while it presents a greater set of challenges) also offers a greater chance of success. And actually making a substantial difference in society.
7. Scott I. Hooker: It gives me the opportunity to target the niche I wish to develop. In my case, estate, business and tax planning. Over the long-term, if I can carve out such a niche, it gives me a chance to target that niche as a prominent practitioner in it.
8. Thuy Nguyen: Exposure to an audience outside your immediate network.
9. Justin Wilson (2L): I'd like to use the Internet as a means for educating legal clients to the process my trial animation business will use to revolutionize the way animations are used as demonstrative evidence - through cinematic techniques like motion-capture.
10. Sarah Russell (2L): Advertising/publishing, quick access to information. many forums for communication.
11. Cade Jobe (3L): Social media - from jobs to contacts to customer service. I don't trust a company that doesn't have a website and it's getting that way with social media.
12. Clarence Wilson (3L): Marketing and branding to a global market.
13. Chase Potter: The plethora of information it provides me.
14. Greg McAllister (an alumnus of this class from two years ago, and now an associate at Gruber Hurst Johansen Hail & Shank): Social media - passive marketing, but opportunities to be active, plus SEO opportunities. Build your brand on your law firm's website.

Unlike some lawyers who have been practicing for a few years (although it's not entirely a function of age or generation), these guys get the enormous potential of the digital assets available.

Here are some of their fears:

1. Steven: Over-regulation or excessive government control. SOPA/PIPA are good recent examples. Further, depersonalization of legal services concerns me. Everyone interacts screen-to-screen more than face-to-face these days. This can reduce the drive to engage in more meaningful ways (more meaningful than "I need XYZ, please respond.")
2. Brett: Easier for clients to contact you via email, leads to them to expect more communication and quicker responses.
3. Laura: Losing a trial and having a reputation ruined.
4. Emily: Software or websites providing legal advice or services for clients - and thus stripping business from attorneys.
5. Brooks: New employer may lie on the website, so you think you are taking a job at one firm and end up at a completely different firm. And ending up on WSJ Blog bad writing examples.
6. Chase: Because of the easy access, how do you "brand" yourself in a manner that is both unique/specialized and valuable to a wide consumer base. The fear is in finding that optimal mix when it seems as though the Internet has grown the number of competitors.
7. Scott: Probably the biggest fear is the Internet's permanence, especially regarding disgruntled clients or other negatives. It's also the challenge of establishing a reputation at all online as one builds a practice.
8. Thuy: The possibility that you can't congtrol what someone else will post about you on the Internet and the irreparable damage it could cause to your reputation.
9. Justin: I fear potential clients won't find my site in a Google search (not being on the first page in a Google search).
10. Sarah: Things I don't want out there getting published (particularly quotes being taken out of context).
11. Cade: Making a mistake and it being published on the web.
12. Clarence: Damage control.
13. Chase: The plethora of information it provides clients or potential clients.
14. Greg: Missed opportunities. Failure to take advantage of it all.

As natural as it is for these students to "live" online, they have most of the same fears that practicing lawyers have. Last year, the big fear of these students was "privacy," and I cautioned them about posting things on Facebook (or anywhere) that could embarrass them or someone close to them later. Strangely, this year it didn't come up, although reputational risk was mentioned several times.

Advice to all law firms with established summer recruiting programs: Ensure that your summer clerks understand the opportunities and the perils of maintaining an active digitial presence. Feel free to download a copy of my SMU Law School presentation.

And Good Luck to the 2012 Law Practice Management class. See you on LinkedIn!

Attorney at Work's "Lawyer Marketing Collection 2011"

If you haven't subscribed to Attorney at Work yet, take 5 minutes during this post-Christmas-gift-exchanging-sale-exploiting week and do it.  To get a taste for the benefit you'll receive, download this free "Lawyer Marketing Collection 2011" -- the most popular/best read Attorney at Work posts during the last year. 

I am happy to say that I have two posts among the 11 featured in this year-end edition - "Nine Questions to ask about your Firm's Website" and "Email Signatures:  Valuable Real Estate (co-authored by colleague Keith Wewe)."

Merrilyn Astin Tarlton and Joan Feldman say this in their intro to this 2011 collection:

Sometimes it seems the only business problem you really have is knowing how to get more clients. Sure, people talk about marketing plans, but exactly what plans should you be making? What’s working for others? What should your next priorities be? Well, if you’ve been longing for someone to just tell you what to do … here we are!

We’ve gathered the top Attorney at Work marketing articles from 2011—the ones readers told us helped them the most, and the ones that generated the most “clicks”—and assembled this handy guide. It may just be the starting point—or the kick in the butt—you’ve been needing. Take a read through them, share and discuss them with colleagues, and we guarantee you won’t need anyone to tell you what belongs in those marketing plans. It will all come from you.

 

3 No cost ways to drive traffic to your website

It's almost New Year's Eve.  I am a believer in making New Year's resolutions - I make them every year.  When Merrilyn Astin Tarlton and Joan Feldman asked me to write a year-end blog post for their popular blog Attorney at Work, I sought to write one that would inspire readers to make a New Year's resolution to focus on making their websites more dynamic.  I challenged myself to come up with three no cost or low cost ways to do so - that are assured of driving more traffic to your website.

This article below first appeared on December 14, 2011 in Attorney at Work.

(You can subscribe to the popular (and free) daily Attorney at Work email on their website. It covers the full gamut of marketing, business development, communication and other practice management advice.)

Your 2012 New Year’s Resolution:  “I resolve to do these 3 things to make our firm website more dynamic.  (Oh, and lose weight and call my mother more often.)”

Do you want to find a way to compete better at a low or no cost?  Are you ready to be viewed as the most relevant expert in your field?  Then choose to follow through with this New Year’s resolution to make your website more dynamic.   Here are 3 things you can do yourself – or with a little help from your marketing team.  The only out-of-pocket cost is a little bit of your time, and the results will be as encouraging as losing that extra 10 pounds.

1.  What is the freshness date of your content?
If you launched a website refresh in 2011, you may think your Internet work is done.  The fact is, those design and content updates are sooo, well, 2011.

Destination news sites have spoiled us when it comes to the currency and relevancy of content.  WSJ.com, CNN and NYTimes.com are just three of hundreds of news sites that offer not just today’s news, but this hour’s breaking news.

It’s impossible for most law firms to meet this high standard of currency.  Still, every law firm should critically review content at least every year, if not more often.  With potentially thousands of pages of content, how do you slog through it and test its relevance?  Here’s how.

        a.  Choose 30 keywords that are important to your firm and practice.  
        b.  Plug them one-by-one into your site search and view the search results.  If you represent multinational companies, for example, “FCPA” should lead to a page of results that are both up-to-date and important.  
        c.  Answer the questions, “Do the search results present our experience in the best light?  Do they highlight our best competencies?” If news articles or e-alerts appear in the search results that are outdated or irrelevant, delete them. 

Every piece of old content causes a visitor to question whether you and your firm are stale.  It taints the perceived efficacy of the good content you have.

2.  Do your offline credentialing activities drive targeted, qualified traffic to your website?

Every (I really mean every) speech and presentation you give should drive traffic to specific pages of your website.  Write your speech with this in mind.  Tell a story about a current event that can be analogized to your specific subject matter, use keywords that are in the news and in conversation and relate to your practice, and ensure that these top keywords appear in your bio and practice description (and that they produce relevant search results if a visitor searches by them).

Include various URLs in your presentation materials that answer your audience’s questions – not your main domain, but interior pages, such as www.firmname.com/fcpa/india or www.firmname.com/ThomasJones.

3.   Take this one step further – create QR codes for these important website pages – and include the QR codes in your handouts and on your business card.

Quick Response codes are becoming ubiquitous in certain fields – automotive, real estate, on movie posters near train stations and on products advertised via airport dioramas – but they are seldom used by lawyers as a marketing tool.

Quick Response codes are basically two-dimensional bar codes that can be read by a mobile phone camera equipped with a code-reading app. Once the QR code is scanned, for instance, the web address embedded in the image pops up on the phone’s browser, saving the device’s owner some typing.   Here is a short primer if you aren’t as familiar as you’d like to be.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QR_codes

While they look like hieroglyphics, they are a one-click pathway to the pages of your website, such as your bio, blog or E-alert library that are the most relevant to what you do.  Instantly create them for new pages on your site to alert visitors and drive traffic to your latest resources.

Here is your step-by-step QR “how-to:” 
        a.  Download a QR Reader app to your Smart Phone and tablet devices
        b.  Open the website page or blog post you want to promote
        c.  Copy the URL of that page
        d.  Go to http://qrcode.kaywa.com/ -  Look at the example below - Choose your content type: a URL for the specific web page, a piece of text, your phone number or a text message.  Next, type in the URL for that bit of info, choose the output size for your QR code (S, M, L or XL – just like buying a sweater), click Generate! and Voila – it will appear in the box on the left.  In this example, I have generated a QR code for our Content Pilot Blogazine – and did so in less than 15 seconds. 

       e.  Save the QR code to your Pictures file on your computer (label it, so you can keep track of them), then liberally insert it into your print and presentation materials.  

    f.  To test it, open your Smart Phone QR Reader app, scan your new QR code and it should launch the website or blog page on your device.

Stay tuned for more tips and tools to make your website the centerpiece of your reputation management and business development.  Good luck with your New Year's resolutions!

Have you heard about "Twitterology?" It's the latest hot new science.

Ben Zimmer is a self-described all-around word nut.  He is the former On Language columnist for The New York Times Magazine, the executive producer of VisualThesaurus.com (an entirely useful tool when you're looking to add color to your prose) and vocabulary.com.

In a recent New York Times Sunday Review column where he claims that "Twitterology" is the latest hot new science, he writes that "Twitter is many things to many people, but lately it has been a gold mine for scholars in fields like linguistics, sociology and psychology who are looking for real-time data to analyze."

He continues, "Twitter’s appeal to researchers is its immediacy — and its immensity. Instead of relying on questionnaires and other laborious and time-consuming methods of data collection, social scientists can simply take advantage of Twitter’s stream to eavesdrop on a virtually limitless array of language in action."

Zimmer discusses a University of Texas study that ensued immediately before and after the death of Libyan dictator Gadhafi.  Linguists and researchers were able to gather thousands of Arabic-language tweets in minutes - before and after the event - used Twitter's system of geocoding, and create a current picture of Libya's Twitter traffic, both good and bad.

In a study that might hit closer to home for everyone reading my blog, Zimmer writes, "Two sociologists at Cornell University, Scott A. Golder and Michael W. Macy, recently published a study in the journal Science that looked at how emotions may relate to the rhythms of daily life, across many English-speaking countries. They observed a gradual falloff in positive terms from the beginning of the workday, bottoming out in the late afternoon."

Has Twitter become our self-intervention therapy?  We're having a bad day and we don't want to have it alone, so we type about it in a few, short keystrokes to hundreds (maybe thousands) of our followers?  If you think that no one is noticing (except for those followers of yours - oh, and those who retweet your post about your bad day), think twice.  The Dean of Carnegie Mellon's School of Computer Science points to the following real-world application of harvesting tweets to study regional  language use across America, "The key finding was that seemingly meaningless slang and jargon can reveal important properties of an author's identity, a point of interest for both corporations and the intelligence community."

Corporations, major law firms and other large employers can hire these linguistic sleuths to uncover unwanted and unwelcome proclamations and traits about current and future employees. Litigators can harvest tweets in real-time to discredit witnesses, defendants and plaintiffs.

Zimmer concludes, "Regardless of how unserious Twitter may appear on the surface . . . linguists are discovering that Twitter can help uncover truths about our social interactions that are quite serious indeed."

Borrowing a classic quote from Sargeant Phil  Esterhaus of Hill Street Blues (advice that we should all  take many times a day), "Hey, let's be careful out there."